The specific code given in the blog post might encounter a LHS, but it's not endemic to that approach of doing linked-list manipulations via double pointers. They can be avoided just as easily using either approach.

The point I am attempting to make is that the double-pointer is very nearly just syntactic sugar that allows the programmer to avoid special-case handling. Semantically there is very little difference between the two approaches; if they are properly implemented, they perform the same memory operations in the same order, and there is no architectural hazard that is specific to one but not the other.